It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Lancashire chip shop forced to remove Union jack.

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 08:17 AM
link   
Perhaps they should fry their chips for longer too.
Those who govern are all too ready to fly the flag in the name of war yet not in the name of the British tradition of good old fish and chips.
I worked for a sign company for a few years as a sign designer - We had to apply for planning permission for most signs - If this sign somehow is in breach of regulations then half of the signs in the country are.
As for aesthetics why should any dictate

edit on 17-3-2012 by artistpoet because: typo




posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 08:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by LightSpeedDriver
reply to post by mr-lizard
 

Never been to a club in my life.
Not about to start now so have all the fun you want! I can smoke in my club and the beer is cheap and no obnoxious people (not a reference to you in case you might think that) are allowed inside my club. My music is way better too.



Haha we'll have to agree to disagree. (Feel free to u2u me some links too
)



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 09:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Jimbowsk
 


your country has been making laws non stop for hundreds of years. i'm pretty sure just getting out of bed in england, you'd have broken 15 laws and regulations.

america's getting there. their congress has run out of ideas, so they're trampling the constitution just to get new laws into place.

it's sad and the only reason it's happening is because a) the people who implement the laws are above it, and b) people love their ipods and comforts to fight about it.

but there comes a time when eventually you get bored of your ipod, mcdonalds and realize wtf.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 09:40 AM
link   
Well I learn one thing from this.

Apparently people have a very hard time on this thread reading things. The flag is clearly being taken down because it's gaudy and has text. Not because of political correctness which has been pointed out multiple times in this thread.


That whole deny ignorance isn't really happening in this thread is it/



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Reptius
Well I learn one thing from this.

Apparently people have a very hard time on this thread reading things. The flag is clearly being taken down because it's gaudy and has text. Not because of political correctness which has been pointed out multiple times in this thread.


That whole deny ignorance isn't really happening in this thread is it/


What do you mean it has no text - It does have text see photo - Gaudy - well that is a matter of aesthetics - The point is that the Union Jack is used - The decision to make them take down the sign is a slimy way of creating yet more ethnic tension and PC is a tool of this - Being British and of working class roots this is an insult.
If you can not see the psychology involved then tough but many can



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 10:19 AM
link   
This issue has nothing to do with being PC, the sign is cheap looking, tacky and it also defaces the Union Flag.
If they were to have their sign with a Union Flag on once side and a English Flag on the other with their text in the middle, noone would mind one bit.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wotan
This issue has nothing to do with being PC, the sign is cheap looking, tacky and it also defaces the Union Flag.
If they were to have their sign with a Union Flag on once side and a English Flag on the other with their text in the middle, noone would mind one bit.


Rubbish are you a sign designer - The city council planning office is bent up - I have worked as sign designer and dealt with them - OK the design is crap yet who are any to say what another uses has to meet some pompous asses opinion. Next we will be told what clothing is suitable and permitable.
Have you seen the London Olympic posters by Tracy Emin - If you want gaudy look there or at McDonalds
You do not understand British culture obviously - Yet another paying lip service to our Nanny Government
edit on 17-3-2012 by artistpoet because: typo

edit on 17-3-2012 by artistpoet because: typo



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 10:38 AM
link   
i wonder if that was a Jamaican flag above a Jamaican BBQ place they would have also to take it down for being 'gordy'?

Silly locals are silly.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 10:52 AM
link   
Give me a few crayons and I could whip up a better sign than that. Looks like someone designed it on Word.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 12:11 PM
link   
I don't think this was due to the Flag of the Union (its only the Union Jack when flown from a ship). It was because the sign was awful and flouted planning laws. Take a look at the picture - it was ugly and distasteful. Nothing to do with the flag. If they had employed a half decent designer (for just a few pounds from any print shop, or a student, or put an add on a classified site for a designer) they would have had no probs. Whoever 'designed' that sign should be deported for crimes against the eyes.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 01:12 PM
link   
If thats the case then the council shouldnt be allowed to put the flag up when its the queens birthday like they do,just in case someone does not like it.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 01:16 PM
link   
Ive been to different countries around the world and seen alot of take aways with there flag above the sign.there is nothing wrong with it what so ever.this country is crap and is getting worse.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by intrepid
 


Canuk here, but a UK expat also. This blows my mind. When the flag of a Nation is taken down for, IMHO, no reason, other than someone's complaint, we are all in worse shape for it. I haven't lived in the UK for a long time, but I do know that when I lived there, this would never have happened.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by dredz
 

You're right dredz, people used to have a sense of style back in the day...now (almost) anything goes as the Bosstones once sang.

Props to both Fylde Council and the Planning Inspector for attempting to keep some character in small towns.

Even artistpoet agrees the design is 'crap'...its too big and busy, it is a design problem tho and nothing to do with the Union Flag; From the op:


"This decision was not based on any objection to displaying either the Union flag or St George's flag.
"Nothing prevents the applicant taking on board these comments and submitting an improved planning application."



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 02:21 PM
link   
Yes some of us are a bit more feral when it comes to our flags and how we represent them.I am very worried about the UK with the overt control efforts being made.Call me if you need another load of guns.I can spare a couple.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 02:58 PM
link   
this is just stupid, yes its an ugly sign but its their buisiness on their property.

The british worked hard to get the rights they have and to be free, we have fought for that for hundreds, in some regards thousands of years and were just loosing all that freedom.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by monkofmimir
 


It's more tha likely not their property (they will probably have a lease) and, seeing as it is signage facing a public highway, it isn't "just their business".. There are rules to prevent people building or putting up anything that can damage the local aesthetic, change the appearance of listed buildings or substantially change the view for anyone else.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


Hardly a listed building in this case = looks like the cheap aesthetically redundant modern building of a local chippie.
So what if the sign is a poor design in others eyes - Have you seen some of the monstrositys that are allowed.
What is the problem with the council officials who are supposed to be public servants yet act like petty tyrants.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by artistpoet
 


Thing is, those "monstrosities" (whichever one you mean) would also have gone through the planning process and if no-one objects during the process, or if their objections are unfounded then permission is granted.

In this case, planning permission was applied for and rejected based upon the sign's design and I would assume some local objections which were backed up by the planning ombudsman. It does go on to say that if they take the design criticisms on board and re-submit with a better design, it will be judged on it's merits and may well be approved.

EDIT: And you would be surprised what god-awful buildings can be listed too....
edit on 17/3/12 by stumason because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by artistpoet
 

Artistpoet, you've said you have experience of designing shop front signage...Iv been told that the fella could make the sign smaller and automatically receive 'deemed consent'. As it is, the size (and therefore visual impact) means the owner requires 'express consent' for permission to display an illuminated sign of that size...

This is about design rather than content.

Its a parade of shops on a residential back street, would it not have easier and cheaper to just stick to the Borough Council's Advertisment Consent guildelines and create a fascia more in keeping with the local area?

edit on 17-3-2012 by joewalker because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
5
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join